I wrote him before Jan 6 to ask him to support John Conyers. I didn't hear back until just now. Here is the form letter he sent (didn't address me personally).

Dear :

Thank you for contacting me regarding the reports of irregularities in this past election and the ratification of the election results. I appreciate your taking the time to write.

I strongly agree with you that it is crucial for our elections to maintain the highest level of integrity, and I remain concerned with reports of voting irregularities that occurred during this past election. As you probably know, a few Democrats from both the House of Representatives and the Senate opposed the certification of the Ohio electors during the certification of the presidential election results on January 6, 2005. This forced both chambers to debate for several hours the validity of the Ohio electors and other reported voting irregularities. Though the recount in Ohio and these hours of debate did not change the result of the election, I believe it is important to understand the extent of the voting irregularities, such as longer wait times at polling places in certain precincts, faulty instructions given by poorly trained poll workers, electronic voting machine malfunctions, and the procedure for casting and verifying provisional ballots. We must then make the necessary changes to ensure that every vote is properly counted.

That said, without additional information indicating that the results would have been different and without the support of Senator John Kerry, I did not think it was appropriate to object to the Ohio electors. I regret that I was not able to attend the debate because I was in southeastern Asia as part of a Congressional delegation trip to, among other things, visit regions struck by the tsunami. I did, however, support the request by Representative John Conyers and other members of the House of Representatives to the General Accountability Office (GAO) asking for an investigation of the 2004 election. The GAO has agreed to examine the security and accuracy of voting technologies, the distribution and allocation of voting machines, and the counting of provisional ballots. I look forward to the results of this report, and I believe that the 109th Congress provides the opportunity to reexamine and improve election procedures.

As you may know, after the widespread problems that occurred during the November 2000 elections, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) as part of an effort to improve the administration of federal elections. This legislation sets mandatory election standards and requirements for voting and voter-registration systems and provides funding to states to better facilitate voting and prevent abuse of our election system. Additionally, this act requires states to develop an interactive, computerized, statewide voter registration list that, when coordinated with Federal records relating to death and identity, can be used to prevent voter registration fraud.

Of course, as provided in the Constitution, elections continue to be administered by the states. Still, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is charged with enforcing Federal election laws and working with civil rights leaders, state and local election officials, and U.S. Attorney Offices prior to Election Day to ensure that citizens' voting rights are protected. Also, to assist states in making responsible decisions about voting procedures and technology, HAVA created a new federal agency, the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), which is responsible for the testing and certification of voting system hardware and software and carrying out grant programs. Unfortunately, the EAC has been limited due to inadequate funding in the President's budget. I believe that adequately funding the EAC will allow it to provide better technical guidance and to conduct studies on important election administration issues.

With regard to a possible recount in New Mexico, I respect the right of political candidates to request a recount. That said, because the difference between the votes for the presidential candidates exceeds what in state law would require a recount, New Mexico taxpayers are not required to pay for it. Still, should the political candidates be able to afford a recount, I believe valuable information could be gathered from it and could contribute to improving election procedures. In closing, people must be afforded the right to vote and those votes must be accurately counted. I appreciate your concern about this important issue, and, as the Senate considers election reform legislation during the 109th Congress, be assured that I will keep your comments in mind.

Again, thank you for writing. Please continue to share your ideas for election reform with me and to inform me of other issues important to you and your community.

Diebold does not have a tabulator issue. The state demanding $1.4mil from the Green Party and Libertarians was criminal and felt more like a bribe to me than and practical need. After all, a recount would simply be the same of the same.

Diebold is paperless, no activities are recorded in each machine, a given machine is programed to 'switch' if there's a Dem vote to a Rep vote. The obvious is the obvious. Diebold is criminal.

This company should be indicted. They rigged Georgia and California. Only the courts can stop these contracts made by Bush/Rove criminal strategists, for its obvious that the House of Reps wont intervene.

after writing to him January 5th. I also wrote him in November and asked that he support Conyers. He responded quickly, and this is an excerpt:

"...I am concerned with documented stories of voting irregularities. While it appears that these irregularities would not have changed the result in any given state, I believe it is important that every vote is properly counted. I understand that several members of the House of Representatives have asked the General Accountability Office to investigate the efficacy of new technologies used in the 2004 election and how election officials responded to difficulties they encountered. I look forward to the results of this report and will continue to monitor this issue and advocate for responsible changes that increase voter confidence."

In November, and again on January 5th, I wrote to Senator Domenici (R) and Representative Wilson (R) and haven't received a response from either.

I have sent him a reply telling him (again) that I am convinced that there was widespread fraud in the last election and provided him with a couple of websites to visit to find out more (these are predominantly exit poll analyses which I consider to be the only strong evidence that is needed to convince anyone who truly understands them).

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.